Allowed

Ramesh Popat Gawali Since Deceased Hence Thr Lrs Smt. Sushilabai Ramesh Gawali and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Collector Dhule Alias the Competent Authority and Others

Bombay HC18 Jul 2023WP/1275/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order by the Reference Court that forfeited a petitioner's right to argue a land acquisition reference. The High Court allowed the petition, holding the order unsustainable as it denied a reasonable opportunity of hearing due to the advocate's illness.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 05.01.2022 is quashed and set aside. The Reference Court is directed to hear all parties on merits and expedite the hearing.

Ramesh Popat Gawali Since Deceased Hence Thr Lrs Smt… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

918-WP-1275-2022

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1275 OF 2022

¶5

Shri. Ramesh Popat Gawali Since deceased hence through Legal Representatives Smt. Sushilabai Ramesh Gawali & Others

¶6

Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State Of Maharashtra And Others

¶9

Respondents

¶10

Mr. Mukul Kulkarni, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.W. Munde, Advocate for respondent No. 1. Mr. M.K. Deshpande, Advocate for respondents No. 3A, 3D to 3I. Mr. S.N. Pawde h/f. Mr. M.K. Bhosale, Advocate for respondent No. 4.

¶11

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

¶12

DATE : 18th JULY, 2023

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

Right of one of the claimant to argue the reference is

¶15

forfeited by the impugned order passed by learned 2^nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule, below Exhibit-19 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 355/2012.

¶16

The learned Senior Advocate who was to argue the matter appeared before the Reference Court at about 1.00 pm. The Reference Court conveyed him that he should attend the Court at 3.50 pm, when the other advocates were to argue the

¶17

Bhagyawant Punde

¶18

{2} 918-WP-1275-2022

¶19

matter. In the afternoon session, it was informed to the Reference Court that the Senior Advocate has left for Aurangabad in order to attend his son, who has been seriously unwell. The Reference Court in the impugned order has observed that, no adjournment application to that effect has been moved and considering the age of the matter and stage of the reference, the reason given by learned advocate is not justifiable. Applicant No. 2/petitioner is playing tactics to prolong the matter. It is informed by the learned advocate for the petitioner that after passing of the impugned order, the matter was adjourned to 15^th January, 2022 and in the meanwhile, the petitioner has challenged the said order.

¶20

Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and on perusing the memo of writ petition, documents and the impugned order, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned order is unsustainable as it denies reasonable and fair opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Reference Court may be right in holding that the application ought to have been filed by the petitioner citing the ground of personal difficulty of learned Senior Advocate but on that ground alone, the Reference Court was not justified in forfeiting the petitioner’s right to argue

¶21

Bhagyawant Punde

¶22

{3} 918-WP-1275-2022

¶23

the reference. The impugned order, therefore cannot be sustained. Hence, the following order:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(I) Writ petition is allowed.

¶26

(II) Impugned order dated 05.01.2022, passed by learned 2^nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhule, below Exhibit-19 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 352/2012, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶27

(III) Reference Court shall hear all the parties on merits and decide the reference in accordance with law.

¶28

(IV) Since, the reference is of the year 2012, hearing is expedited.

¶29

[NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

¶30

Bhagyawant Punde

Ramesh Popat Gawali Since Deceased Hence Thr Lrs Smt. Sushilabai Ramesh Gawali and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Collector Dhule Alias the Competent Authority and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Popat Gawali Since Deceased Hence Thr Lrs Smt. Sushilabai Ramesh Gawali and Others v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Collector Dhule Alias the Competent Authority and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Superintending Engineer Nanded Patbandhare Mandal and Others Vs Ramdas Govind Bhand

Rukhminibai Janardan Rahinj and Another Vs Vitthal Balwant Bhavar and Others

Vinod Panjabrao Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Waman Fakira Burud Vs Ramesh Maruti Dhapse and Others

Maroti Baburao Biradar and Another Vs Kalavati Ramrao Kaname and Others

Khare Tarkunde Sancheti Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Thr Managing Director Manohar Ramchandra Tarkunde Vs Balaji Hiraman Barse Since Deceased through Lrs Pandminibai Balaji Barse and Another